“Game of Thrones” Complainers Review Classic Movies

Game of Thrones just concluded and the series has been and will continue to be recognized as the most complex, exhilarating, heart-breaking, beautiful yet tragic epic to ever appear on a screen.

We shall never see its like again.

But some people only want to complain, and perhaps you have noticed that the complainers aren’t nearly as sophisticated and insightful as they think they are. Moreover, these Game of Thrones Complainers don’t appreciate depth and meaning, they scrutinize irrelevant details, and they flat out misunderstand what they are viewing. To be blunt, their attacks on Game of Thrones are irrational and even absurd. Can you imagine if these people were commenting on social media about some of the most beloved classic movies?

Well now you don’t have to imagine:

Game of Thrones Complainers Review Classic Movies

“Jaws” (1975)

The shark is a really one-dimensional character and why are the other characters so obsessed with it? If the shark is going to get this much attention and screen time, we really need more of the shark’s back-story.

“Psycho” (1960)

Norman Bates is supposedly managing this hotel, but we never really see how. Like how do the laundry, janitorial, and food services work? We’re never told. And the whole “mother” character seems like a really misogynist stereotype. The shower scene was ridiculous– the gallons-per-minute flow of the water was different with each camera angle; having more consistent water pressure might have made the scene work thematically.

“The Wizard of Oz” (1939)

The production quality on this is so terrible that the first 20 minutes don’t even have color. Why does Dorothy keep breaking into song? And where are the instruments? And seriously “Over the Rainbow”? I’m for gay rights, but I don’t need to be bashed over the head with it when I’m trying to watch a movie. Why does the Cowardly Lion walk upright? And they keep worrying about the Tin Man rusting, but tin doesn’t rust! (Only iron rusts, whereas tin oxidizes) These inconsistencies make the movie unwatchable.

“The Godfather” (1972)

This whole movie is one big Italian stereotype. Do the writers think all Italians are in the mafia? Vito Corleone has unbelievable plot armor– he’s shot five times and lives, but then ridiculously, he’s killed by a tomato garden? And what’s up with those guys getting sent a dead fish? A practical joke in a supposedly serious film seemed really out of place.

“E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” (1982)

The whole movie is basically a sexist indictment of single-motherhood. Like if you try to raise your kids without a husband, aliens are going to visit you and ruin your life. Why did they never show the planet that E.T. came from? Or was Earth his original home and the aliens returned to recolonize it? We never get any answers.

“Raiders of the Lost Ark” (1981)

Stealing an artifact from aboriginal peoples is a way too obvious metaphor for European conquest and cultural appropriation, and the portrayal of the tribe was racist. Plus the film’s clear endorsement of Nazi ideology is grossly offensive. When the ark is open and kills everyone, the writers are endorsing a vengeful god. If I wanted a boring presentation featuring an angry Old Testament god, I would go to a bible study class instead of watching this movie.

“2001: A Space Odyssey” (1968)

Nothing about this movie makes sense. Hal seems to be the main character but they never show him, and it’s basically a Matrix rip off. Also, it seems to take place in the future but also in the past; it’s so chronologically disjointed. And there is virtually no character development. If it takes place in space, why are there no alien cultures?

“Titanic” (1997)

Didn’t the whole disaster movie genre die in the 1970s? And they couldn’t come up with a more exciting premise than a boat sinking? And why is the boat so enormous and ornate? I’ve been on cruise ships and they don’t have all that gaudy decoration. And the musicians playing as the boat sank was the dumbest thing I ever saw… was that supposed to be comic relief? Also, killing Jack was a total mistake– the main message seems to be that if you try to be an artist instead of being rich, you freeze to death and drown.

“The Matrix” (1999)

The entire movie centers around the Smith antagonist but we’re never told his first name. Neo learns Kung Fu way too quickly and why does he need it anyway with all those guns? And Cypher decides to live in the matrix but we never learn the details of the new life he chose which is a major plot hole. And with all this advanced technology, why can’t they make anything other than oatmeal?

Good Will Hunting (1997)

This is the most pointless movie. Some genius student is too busy drinking with his friends and getting into fights to go to class. So they send him to a therapist (for some issues or whatever) who basically tells him to drop out and not get a job so he can chase some girl he met. And they never show his parents… wouldn’t they have gotten involved? The message is awful: Hey kids, drop out of school.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Let me get this straight: some accountant is in jail for murdering his wife and then decides to become a rock collector? The whole time we’re supposed to believe he’s actually innocent but then he hangs some old guy for no reason. Meanwhile he’s teaching something mysterious (we’re never shown the lesson plans) to some TV thief who then gets shot trying to escape (presumably a set-up by the accountant). Just when we think he’s going to get busted for this murder spree, he accidentally discovers that there’s some sewage tunnel conveniently placed behind a poster in his jail cell, so he crawls through it and escapes. It’s like they’re trying to tell us that crime pays and just murder people for no reason and there will be light (money) at the end of the tunnel which is a ridiculously unsubtle metaphor for an awful concept.

The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

As if the first Buck Rogers rip off movie about a bunch of robots and a space bear wasn’t bad enough, now there’s a second movie with a terrible name that no one is going to like. They couldn’t even keep the same director which leads to completely different pacing and tone than the first movie, and to other glaring inconsistencies– Like those laser swords… one is red, one is blue….would it have been so hard to be consistent? Such bad production quality. Plus, half the movie is spent on a swamp planet with some “great warrior” who is just a frog muppet. If he was such a great warrior, why was he living in a place like that? Plus he has some special levitation powers for some unexplained reason. But the worst part is this frog muppet tells the main character (can’t remember his name) not to leave the swamp and to just let his friends die which was obviously for selfish reasons since he’s there all alone in the swamp world which is actually weird– why are there no other frogs like him in the swamp? Did he kill them all and that’s why he’s a great warrior? There are so many missing pieces to this mess of a movie. The worst part is at the end they throw in some stupid twist (probably because a new director took over) that the main character’s father is actually the villian which of course makes no sense and is just for shock value. They should have never made a sequel to the first movie, but with this disaster, I’m sure we’ve seen the last of this awful bunch of characters.

Thanks Marilyn! I was hoping to lampoon the complainers in a way that parallels the misguided criticisms but also was just plain funny. I’m glad it connected with you. And yes, I missed lots of other movies! My first version of this billed it as the “first of a possible multi-part series”. So perhaps I’ll have a second round of movies, or think about Game of Thrones Complainers Reviewing Classic Books! The possibilities are endless! Thanks again for your comment and appreciation.

Thanks Ellie! I had a lot of fun composing it, but I think it also captures the erratic and irrational nature of the complainers, and also the unwelcome trend to dissect all modern entertainment to the point of complete absurdity. A few examples that inspired my effort were nonsense like “look! no stone on the ground over here! Jamie and Cersei could have survived!” which of course this ignores the symbolism, beauty, and tragedy of that scene in favor of the minutiae of a frame or two showing less rubble. Additionally the “how could Jon not pet Ghost!! Bad writing!” completely misses the point of that scene (and other scenes) that highlight that the Dire Wolves are powerful symbols that track the status of each Stark child. When Jon left Ghost, it illustrated the pain, conflict and division within Jon who literally said there’s nothing for him in Westeros, he’ll be happier up North. This of course foreshadowed and paralleled Jon’s destiny. So the deeper meaning and purpose of that scene was replaced by nonsensical reactive complaints online (until Jon reunited with Ghost in the finale). There are endless other examples, but the culture of complaining rather than offering the insight, analysis and appreciation that art deserves is a problem that hopefully I conveyed here with humor. Thanks again for your comment.

Just because people ranging from impartial professionals to dedicated and disappointed fans who have invested years of their lives and energy in this show criticize something you like does not mean that they are wrong or their criticisms are invalid. Many people have offered far more carefully crafted and cogent critiques of the show than this obtuse, uninspired railing at anyone who dares to offer a negative opinion.

Thank you for your comment Rams. In a general way, yes- if someone criticizes something I like it doesn’t mean their criticisms are invalid. However, criticisms that contain factual errors, grossly magnify irrelevant minutia, or completely misunderstand the themes and messages of the artist are not valid and don’t contribute to a better understanding of the show. Real think pieces have been written analyzing a character’s behavior (see my piece Sympathy for Daenerys), or the political state of Westeros at the end (see “Westeros is Screwed” by Max Read), or any number or other really interesting perspectives that provide actual insight into the events, characters, and composition that made the deep world of Game of Thrones worthy of discussion. But most of the criticism is just mindless complaining that confuses disappointment in what happened with characters at the end (or even that the show ended) with HOW the show was made. I again maintain that real analysis is conducted within the world GRRM and D&D created, not in playing armchair director about how a scene was shot or how a line was delivered. Truly dedicated fans understand that this story (which didn’t start with S1E1 and didn’t end with S8E6) is a tragedy and was carefully crafted from the beginning. A few (not “many”) critics (including myself) have quibbled with a few nuances of the show in a reasonable way while still appreciating the overall masterful work that it was. But a negative “group think” has dominated that draws upon blatant misunderstanding of the artistry of the work as a whole (see my response to Ellie above). I would like to think that my piece was inspired (in fact it was by nonsensical railing) and ridicules those that would rather complain than understand and would rather dissect than appreciate; and I put this forth in a humorous way that hopefully captures the spirit of those who are missing the depth and beauty of this amazing show. I would recommend viewing the youtube video called “8 Things Everyone Is Getting Wrong About Game Of Thrones” which does an excellent job of very reasonably highlighting, explaining, and dismantling several misconceptions that underlie all the complaining. Thanks again for your reply.